Symmetry conjecture for graphs with edge-disjoint cycles

Less than 1 year old · traced to

Let GG be a graph, and let TχGo(q)T\chi_G^o(q) denote its total oriented chromatic quasisymmetric function. Say that cycles of GG are edge-disjoint when no two cycles share an edge. Symmetry conjecture for edge-disjoint cycles. If no two cycles of GG share an edge, then TχGo(q)T\chi_G^o(q) is symmetric. The preceding theorem proves the corresponding identity for trees, while the conjectured extension to graphs whose cycles are pairwise edge-disjoint is not resolved in the supplied text.

References

Primary source

Laura Colmenarejo and Ian Klein, “The Total Chromatic Quasisymmetric Functions of a Graph”, arXiv:2601.23170 (2026).

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A reader-written calculation claims a six-vertex graph with one cycle disproves the conjecture, but the claim has not been independently checked.

Colmenarejo and Klein state the symmetry conjecture in their January 2026 paper: edge-disjoint cycles should force symmetry of the total oriented chromatic quasisymmetric function. The paper presents this extension beyond trees as unresolved.

Known results

  • For a tree with m=∣E∣m=|E|, Colmenarejo and Klein prove TχGΓ(q)=(q+1)mχGT\chi_G^\Gamma(q)=(q+1)^m\chi_G, hence symmetry (2026).

Posted attempt

A reader-written argument claims a complete counterexample: a connected graph on 66 vertices with one 44-cycle and two leaves, satisfying the hypothesis. It reports unequal coefficients [qx1x2x32x42]TG=374[q x_1x_2x_3^2x_4^2]T_G=374 and [qx1x22x3x42]TG=376[q x_1x_2^2x_3x_4^2]T_G=376, so symmetry would fail. The calculation has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): The tree case is proved, while the edge-disjoint-cycle conjecture has an unverified claimed counterexample and therefore remains mathematically unsettled.

Sources

Solutions 1

CounterexampleThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

The conjecture is false, already for a connected graph with six vertices and just one cycle.

In Colmenarejo and Klein, Conjecture 3.14, the function in question is

TG(x;q)=∑γ∈Γ(G)∑κ properqasc⁡γ(κ)∏v∈V(G)xκ(v),\begin{aligned} T_G(\mathbf x;q)&= \sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma(G)}\sum_{\kappa\text{ proper}}\\ &\qquad q^{\operatorname{asc}_{\gamma}(\kappa)} \prod_{v\in V(G)}x_{\kappa(v)}, \end{aligned}

where Γ(G)\Gamma(G) consists of all acyclic orientations, κ\kappa is a proper coloring by positive integers, and an oriented edge u→vu\to v is an ascent when κ(u)<κ(v)\kappa(u)<\kappa(v). We use this orientation sum, not the distinct variant that sums over vertex labelings.

Take V(G)={1,2,3,4,5,6}V(G)=\{1,2,3,4,5,6\} and

E(G)={12,23,34,41,15,26}.E(G)=\{12,23,34,41,15,26\}.

Here uvuv denotes the undirected edge {u,v}\{u,v\}. Thus 1,2,3,41,2,3,4 form a four-cycle, and 5,65,6 are leaves attached to 1,21,2, respectively. The only cycle is the four-cycle, so the hypothesis that no two cycles share an edge is satisfied.

We will prove

[q x1x2x32x42]TG=374,[q x1x22x3x42]TG=376.\begin{aligned} [q\,x_1x_2x_3^2x_4^2]T_G&=374,\\ [q\,x_1x_2^2x_3x_4^2]T_G&=376. \end{aligned}

These two monomials are interchanged by x2↔x3x_2\leftrightarrow x_3, so the unequal coefficients disprove symmetry.

1. Counting orientations with one ascent

For a proper coloring κ\kappa, let a(κ)a(\kappa) be the number of ascents around the fixed direction

1⟶2⟶3⟶4⟶1.1\longrightarrow2\longrightarrow3\longrightarrow4\longrightarrow1.

Among all orientations of the six edges, exactly six have one ascent: choose the ascending edge, and orient each other edge from its larger-colored endpoint to its smaller-colored endpoint.

An orientation is cyclic precisely when the four-cycle is coherently directed. Therefore, among those six orientations, exactly one must be discarded if a(κ)=1a(\kappa)=1 or a(κ)=3a(\kappa)=3, and none otherwise. In the discarded orientation both leaf edges point in the descending direction. Consequently, for a fixed color multiplicity profile, its coefficient at qq is

6N−N1−N3,6N-N_1-N_3,

where NN counts proper colorings with that profile and NjN_j counts those with a(κ)=ja(\kappa)=j.

2. The number of proper colorings

For either profile, N=64N=64. It suffices to count the profile (1,1,2,2)(1,1,2,2), in which colors 3,43,4 occur twice: swapping colors 2,32,3 gives a bijection to the other profile.

If the four cycle colors are distinct, the two leaf colors must be 3,43,4. For either ordering of these leaf colors, inclusion-exclusion gives 24−6−6+2=1424-6-6+2=14 permissible cycle permutations. This contributes 2828.

If exactly three cycle colors occur, the repeated color is either 33 or 44 and occupies opposite vertices. Fix that repeated color. If the other doubled color is absent from the cycle, there are four cycle arrangements, each with one leaf extension. Otherwise, one of colors 1,21,2 is absent. For each of these two choices there are four cycle arrangements: two have one leaf extension and two have two leaf extensions. This contributes

2(4+(2+4)+(2+4))=32.2\bigl(4+(2+4)+(2+4)\bigr)=32.

If exactly two cycle colors occur, they must be the alternating colors 3,43,4. There are two cycle arrangements and two orders for leaf colors 1,21,2, contributing 44. Thus N=28+32+4=64N=28+32+4=64.

3. The exceptional cycle colorings

If a color repeats on the four-cycle, it repeats at opposite vertices. Each two-edge route between those vertices has one ascent and one descent, so a(κ)=2a(\kappa)=2.

Thus a(κ)=3a(\kappa)=3 requires all four colors to be distinct. The ordered cycle colors (κ(1),κ(2),κ(3),κ(4))(\kappa(1),\kappa(2),\kappa(3),\kappa(4)) must be one of the four cyclic rotations of (1,2,3,4)(1,2,3,4). The following table lists every possible leaf-color pair (κ(5),κ(6))(\kappa(5),\kappa(6)) for these rotations.

Cycle colorsProfile (1,1,2,2)(1,1,2,2)Profile (1,2,1,2)(1,2,1,2)
(1,2,3,4)(1,2,3,4)(3,4)(3,4) or (4,3)(4,3)(2,4)(2,4)
(2,3,4,1)(2,3,4,1)(3,4)(3,4)(4,2)(4,2)
(3,4,1,2)(3,4,1,2)(4,3)(4,3)(4,2)(4,2)
(4,1,2,3)(4,1,2,3)(3,4)(3,4)(2,4)(2,4)

Hence N3=5N_3=5 for the first profile and N3=4N_3=4 for the second.

The graph automorphism (1 2)(3 4)(5 6)(1\ 2)(3\ 4)(5\ 6) reverses the direction of the four-cycle and preserves each color multiplicity profile. It takes a(κ)a(\kappa) to 4−a(κ)4-a(\kappa), so N1=N3N_1=N_3 for each profile.

The two coefficients are therefore

6⋅64−5−5=374,6⋅64−4−4=376.\begin{aligned} 6\cdot64-5-5&=374,\\ 6\cdot64-4-4&=376. \end{aligned}

They are different. Thus TG(x;q)T_G(\mathbf x;q) is not symmetric, although GG has only one cycle, disproving Conjecture 3.14.